Wednesday, July 09, 2014

The proposed policy, which is still in the working stages, could potentially say that fans who wear culturally insensitive attire to games or use culturally insensitive language could be asked to stop by Giants security or potentially be asked to leave the stadium.

Staci Slaughter, Giants senior vice president, communications, and senior advisor to the CEO, said the Giants have policies about obscene language and offensive signs.

“We are considering expanding the policy to be more explicit about culturally insensitive signs and articles of clothing,” she told USA TODAY Sports
“I don’t want to overstate where we are,” she added. “We haven’t finalized the language. We are still in the process of revising it.”

The proposed policy comes after an incident at a Giants game last month when two Native Americans approached a group of men who were passing around a fake headdress to tell them it was disrespectful. One of the Native Americans asked for the headdress and then declined to return it. Security was called and the Native Americans were detained but not arrested. The incident occurred on Native American Heritage Night…

“It is not acceptable for anyone to wear blackface anymore,” said Jacqueline Keeler, a founder of Eradicating Offensive Native Mascotry. “So why is it acceptable for fans to come to stadiums dressed in redface? The clowning of our culture must stop.”

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Some fans of sports teams with Indian-themed names have long attended games wearing feathers and war paint.

“It is not acceptable for anyone to wear blackface anymore,” said Jacqueline Keeler, a founder of Eradicating Offensive Native Mascotry. “So why is it acceptable for fans to come to stadiums dressed in redface? The clowning of our culture must stop.”

What if a Native American happens to decide that he wants to go to the game wearing his headdress? Is he going to be required to carry identification on his person certifying himself as being authentically Native American?

What about a guy who's half Native American and half evil white man? Will he be permitted to don the headdress, forbidden, or only allowed half a headdress?

“It is not acceptable for anyone to wear blackface anymore,” said Jacqueline Keeler, a founder of Eradicating Offensive Native Mascotry. “So why is it acceptable for fans to come to stadiums dressed in redface? The clowning of our culture must stop.”

If you ask me, this Jacqueline Keeler lady oughta get out of the Native American anti-defamation business, and into the animal rights racket. Why, you ask?

Well, because then she could call herself Jacqueline "Free Willy" Keeler.

What if a Native American happens to decide that he wants to go to the game wearing his headdress? Is he going to be required to carry identification on his person certifying himself as being authentically Native American?

What about a guy who's half Native American and half evil white man? Will he be permitted to don the headdress, forbidden, or only allowed half a headdress?

Silly, every month is White History Month. Didn't you pay attention in high school history class, where every day was a new opportunity to learn more about the exploits of privileged white males through the ages?

My father in law has a series of "Kid's US History in Pictures" from the 60s, I flipped through the one about 1880-1900 the other day and literally the entire book was about white politicians and businessmen. There was a grand total of one page dedicated to the Native American wars (and I believe it used the term "war whoops"), and one paragraph (!) dedicated to culture - a blurby list of novels of the time, including Huck Finn and The Wizard of Oz.

What about a guy who's half Native American and half evil white man? Will he be permitted to don the headdress, forbidden, or only allowed half a headdress?

Your comment is all in good fun, I understand, but this is an important issue at powwows. Non-Indians should stand at given times, show respect, sometimes give money as appropriate, but being "on the drum" (singing and playing for dances) or dancing itself is not something they should just get up and do, however well-intentioned (let alone as a kind of wacky party stunt). By that token, "Half Native American" would almost always be more than OK for participation. Blood quantum is a very real legal and cultural issue, as is demonstrated participation and commitment in a culture. It can be a relatively small quantum, but if it is, then a person's cultural participation, residence in a community, and other factors can determine identity.

I can pretty much guarantee that someone with 50% Indian ancestry showing up for Native American Night would be allowed to decide exactly how s/he would like to dress and participate.

Get a grip, Srul. It was humor injected into a borderline politics thread.

I agree, Jason, but just remember that the next time someone starts whining when someone else does the same thing. We've got an excess of solemnistas around here sometimes, and it isn't always just Brown Diaper Baby Joey.

---------------------------------------------------

Silly, every month is White History Month.

That reminds me of the classic National Lampoon Ivory Magazine parody of Ebony, which reviewed Kate Smith in the movie "Lady Sings The Scales", and had a feature story about Congress with a picture labeled "Your White Caucus At Work". Of course the picture was of the entire Congress, which at the time was about 97% white.

I agree, Jason, but just remember that the next time someone starts whining when someone else does the same thing. We've got an excess of solemnistas around here sometimes, and it isn't always just Brown Diaper Baby Joey.

I don't mind the occasional snide political jab, Andy, but you may recall what I kvetched about several weeks back involved someone here -- a dude who I don't think has ever participated in OTP -- hijacking another perfectly fine baseball thread discussing, you know, baseball with a fairly long political rant, this time about Fox News.

Andy was also recently called out for suggesting that the lawsuit by the sleeping fan was comparable to John Boehner's case against Obama. The big problem may be that he is under the impression that inserting (smile) makes his post funny.

I agree, Jason, but just remember that the next time someone starts whining when someone else does the same thing. We've got an excess of solemnistas around here sometimes, and it isn't always just Brown Diaper Baby Joey.

I don't mind the occasional snide political jab, Andy, but you may recall what I kvetched about several weeks back involved someone here -- a dude who I don't think has ever participated in OTP -- hijacking another perfectly fine baseball thread discussing, you know, baseball with a fairly long political rant, this time about Fox News.

I agree with your complaint in cases like that, but the truth is that all these threads are fluid, and morph from one topic to another. For every political "hijacking", there are a dozen hijacks into other topics that have no connection whatever to baseball. But for whatever reason, it only seems to offend certain people when someone like you or I throw in a one liner with no real intent to steer the topic astray. Personally I don't take those complaints seriously, because they're so full of their own pomposity that they kind of collapse of their own weight.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Andy was also recently called out for suggesting that the lawsuit by the sleeping fan was comparable to John Boehner's case against Obama. The big problem may be that he is under the impression that inserting (smile) makes his post funny.

Well, I suppose if you take Boehner's lawsuit seriously, you might not see the humor in the parallel. But then since everything about Obama is deadly "serious" to the Solemnistas, I can see why a throwaway line like that might not amuse you. I'd suggest reading Tom The Dancing Bug for a few weeks as part of your rest cure.

Aren't those "panda hats" I sometimes see fans at Giants games wearing culturally insensitive to the Chinese, and perhaps even to pandas themselves? Don't these monsters know that the Giant Panda is a seriously endangered species and not to be made light of?

Your comment is all in good fun

It is in good fun, but this story is just more evidence (as if we needed any) of how completely insane San Francisco leftists and Moursundian red diaper babies in general have become.

As a private entity, the Giants can impose whatever restrictions on the attire of their customer base that they want. Philosophically, this is no different than a "No shoes, no shirt - no service" policy.

In practice, it could be a good thing or a bad one, depending on the way in which it is enforced.

I agree with your complaint in cases like that, but the truth is that all these threads are fluid, and morph from one topic to another. For every political "hijacking", there are a dozen hijacks into other topics that have no connection whatever to baseball. But for whatever reason, it only seems to offend certain people when someone like you or I throw in a one liner with no real intent to steer the topic astray. Personally I don't take those complaints seriously, because they're so full of their own pomposity that they kind of collapse of their own weight.

Fair enough. Now what would it take for Jim to authorize a monthly Game of Thrones thread...?

It is in good fun, but this story is just more evidence (as if we needed any) of how completely insane San Francisco leftists and Moursundian red diaper babies in general have become.

Well, never mind that on this issue I part company with whichever San Francisco leftists may be raising a stink, but I have to feel flattered that I've apparently joined Gonfalon on your Brown Diaper Doper enemies list. If only I could monetize such an honor, I'd offer you a kickback.

I agree with your complaint in cases like that, but the truth is that all these threads are fluid, and morph from one topic to another. For every political "hijacking", there are a dozen hijacks into other topics that have no connection whatever to baseball. But for whatever reason, it only seems to offend certain people when someone like you or I throw in a one liner with no real intent to steer the topic astray. Personally I don't take those complaints seriously, because they're so full of their own pomposity that they kind of collapse of their own weight.

Fair enough. Now what would it take for Jim to authorize a monthly Game of Thrones thread...?

I'd settle for a monthly thread on the moral and intellectual superiority of nine ball to soccer, and maybe another one on the many virtues of black & white movies from the pre-code and noir eras over the mindless special effects we get in today's Hollywood blockbuster trash. (smiles and ducks)

That would mean a single great-grandparent from a given tribe, the rest of one's great-grandparents being of white or indeed any number of different ethnicities, including other Indian groups. That's not at all unusual for tribal membership and/or cultural participation.

I could have stood to be more obvious in my sarcasm. [5] sounded a little too much as coming from a dickish place of privilege for me. "Well, you can make me be nice, but I'm sure going to be an ####### about it..."

Andy was also recently called out for suggesting that the lawsuit by the sleeping fan was comparable to John Boehner's case against Obama. The big problem may be that he is under the impression that inserting (smile) makes his post funny.

Well, I suppose if you take Boehner's lawsuit seriously, you might not see the humor in the parallel. But then since everything about Obama is deadly "serious" to the Solemnistas, I can see why a throwaway line like that might not amuse you. I'd suggest reading Tom The Dancing Bug for a few weeks as part of your rest cure.

I wasn't the one that called out Andy on the lame Boehner "joke", it was actually one of his fellow Team Blue compatriots, who noticed yet another unfunny political reference from someone who claims that he rarely does that. However, I'll be glad to give Andy a pass on any "joke" that is as subtle & humorous as JE's Elizabeth Warren jibe. It'd be a first.

Of course my "joke" comparing the sleeping fan's lawsuit against ESPN to John Boehner's threatened lawsuit against Obama just happens to be 100% true (they both have a 0% chance of succeeding), and the truth apparently hurts. But go on and amuse us with a few bon mots from Dennis Miller and Rush Limbaugh; I won't object.

"Sensitive" white American liberals share equally with "insensitive" white American "conservatives" the spoils of mistreatment of Native Americans by earlier generations of whites.

Renounce those spoils and we can talk. Until then, they're just silly hypocrites. Being more "sensitive" about Native Americans' "feelings" is never going to undo the crimes of the past.(*) People just need to accept that and move on. They look ridiculous.

(*) We must distinguish here between silly gestures toward "sensitivity" like the Giants' and forbidding flat out slurs such as the nickname of the Washington NFL franchise.

So you're okay with The Zulu Warriors and crowds showing up in blackface and spears and chanting "UNGAWA!!"

I am. As a Jew I'd be even happier at a Hebrews game where people wore stick-on payot and danced the Hora in the aisles after a big homer. Just don't throw stale bagels at Whitey Ford.

Seriously, have fun, it's sport, it's frivolous by nature. If fans of other teams started showing up wearing Nazi uniforms and chanting "fire up the ovens" (or showing up to Zulu Warrior games in Klan robes carrying a noose) then they're the jerks, not the people having fun with the heritage.

"Sensitive" white American liberals share equally with "insensitive" white American "conservatives" the spoils of mistreatment of Native Americans by earlier generations of whites.

Renounce those spoils and we can talk. Until then, they're just silly hypocrites. Being more "sensitive" about Native Americans' "feelings" is never going to undo the crimes of the past.(*) People just need to accept that and move on. They look ridiculous.

(*) We must distinguish here between silly gestures toward "sensitivity" like the Giants' and forbidding flat out slurs such as the nickname of the Washington NFL franchise.

Translation: As long as we agree to say "Washington Professional Football Team" instead of that Naughty Name We Mustn't Mention, we can keep pretending that racial problems are all in the obsessive imaginations of liberals and minorities.

Income gaps? It's all the fault of their culture!

Racial profiling? An understandable response to crime and terrorism!

Job discrimination against people with "black sounding" names? Stupid parents shouldn't give their kids these names!

But "Washington Redskins"? Now THAT's a real issue with no other POVs permitted, and if anyone still uses the name they're the worst kind of racists!

I am. As a Jew I'd be even happier at a Hebrews game where people wore stick-on payot and danced the Hora in the aisles after a big homer. Just don't throw stale bagels at Whitey Ford.

And if the ushers showed up with hook noses and went around collecting coins from fans? (Special coin wins a prize!)

Like anything else it can be done tastefully or not. I don't think any of the Indian-themed teams have ushers in feathered headdresses and loincloths telling customers how much wampum they need pay-um for hot dog.

I don't think any of the Indian-themed teams have ushers in feathered headdresses and loincloths telling customers how much wampum they need pay-um for hot dog.

Heh.

No, the ushers don't. But the team allows its fans to perpetuate a negative stereotype (the savage warrior). And the ushers are team employees. I just took it a step further.

Edit: I tried to find 'Mongols' as a team mascot and couldn't really come up with a definitive example. True, 'Indians' would be more natural to US teams, but it's not like the US has a huge Spartan or Trojan heritage also. Surely if there are some 900 Indian mascots, there should be a few Mongols.

But the team allows its fans to perpetuate a negative stereotype (the savage warrior).

Honestly, who cares? No one actually believes Native American's currently are savage warriors (being drunks - that's another story). It's a stereotype based off of a 200 year old archetype that doesn't effect anyone anymore. It would be like making fun of Vikings for being rapists, there's no harm in the stereotype anymore because it's so distanced from reality.

I agree with SBB that it's all a facade for liberals to placate themselves (not that there's anything so noble about the rights of idiots to dress like Indians at a baseball game).

Honestly, who cares? No one actually believes Native American's currently are savage warriors

No, but it perpetuates the myth that they WERE savage warriors.

Who cares? I care. Because it leads to marginalization. And it leads to dismissal. Which has been my BIGGEST complaint for the...well....history of the internet.

"What's wrong with Redskins?"
"What's wrong with Squaw?"
"When did we become a nation of pussies?"

"No one actually cares (except for some butt hurt folk) that Columbus was a genocidal maniac"
"No one cares that Teddy Roosevelt said 'I wouldn't say the only good Indian is a dead Indian. But 9 out of 10? yes.'"
"No one cares what Andrew Jackson did. He's on the $20!"

So you're okay with The Zulu Warriors and crowds showing up in blackface and spears and chanting "UNGAWA!!"

Of course you are Snapper.

Blackface, no. There's a clear racist/mocking connection to that.

I see nothing inherently wrong with a team called the Zulus, or Zulu Warriors. Using paraphernalia based on real Zulu weapons or dress, or using an authentic Zulu war chant would also seem appropriate.

I don't see the problem with saying "we want our team to emulate these fierce warriors". Do you have a problem with the New Zealand All Blacks and their dances? Would a team called the "Centurions", where the fans wore Roman Legionary equipment and shouted "Vae Victis" be offensive to Italians?

Using mocking caricatures or chants is problematic. I'm not a fan of the Tomahawk chop, and I can see the objections to Chief Wahoo.

Weren't they savage warriors? I mean, not all of them, but it's probably tough to find a culture that didn't have savage warriors.

Yup. American Indian warriors were rough customers; including ritual torture of captives and ritual mutilation of dead enemies.

Not that they were uniquely savage; the Romans used to punish rebellions with mass crucifixions, lined up along the main roads like telephone polls. The Mongols build pyramids of skulls to mark their victories. The Turks and Balkan peoples liked to impale captives.

Some English kings let dead bodies hang from poles in London until they rotted away.

The Aztec would cut out the hearts of living POWs and drop them (the bodies) over the side of their temples (the hearts they apparently cooked, I take it their gods didn't like raw meat)

The various Soviet security agencies had a fondness for shooting people point blank in the back of the head (the infamous Katyn massacre wasn't a singular event/mass killing- the 20-25,000 killed were each killed individually one at a time, over a period of 2-3 months)

I agree with SBB that it's all a facade for liberals to placate themselves

Except that 90% of SBB's allies on this one issue are from the group that he routinely mocks and demonizes any other time that race happens to be the topic of discussion. He poses as this big anti-racist against the Redskins name, while without skipping a beat he just as fiercely denounces anyone who ever mentions issues like racial profiling against blacks or Latinos.

My assumption with pre-modern Native Americans is that they were no better or worse than any other group of humans. They weren't all bloodthirsty savages, nor were they all peaceful environmentalist proto-hippies. And obviously it wasn't a monolithic culture. They fought each other, committed atrocities against each other, etc. Just like everyone else on Earth.

Do you have a problem with the New Zealand All Blacks and their dances?

I don't form opinions on different cultures cause It's not my place. I haven't the faintest clue on the relationships over there.

See. We're all having a civil discussion without being dismissive. And some people are coming around on the problem of dressing up and caricatured 'war chants'. That's all I ask. *I* don't have a problem with "Indians" and "Blackhawks" or "Braves". (I do with Redskins) but if someone does have a problem, I don't want to see them dismissed.

Edit: I tried to find 'Mongols' as a team mascot and couldn't really come up with a definitive example. True, 'Indians' would be more natural to US teams, but it's not like the US has a huge Spartan or Trojan heritage also. Surely if there are some 900 Indian mascots, there should be a few Mongols.

I was actually AT this game for Native American Hertiage night. Suffice to say, the Giants got beaten like Native Americans.

I did see a guy at an SF skatepark wearing what I thought was a "Stormfront" t-shirt! That was pretty offensive. But it turns out that I just misread the font and it was a shirt for some Death Metal band like "Suffocation".

Could you wear the old Metallica T-shirt, "Metal Up Your Ass", with the sword driving upwards through the toilet? Are local metal bands exempt? That's got to be objectionable to somebody, or is it considered culturally neutral. I love me some metal but I don't want it up my ass.

Except that 90% of SBB's allies on this one issue are from the group that he routinely mocks and demonizes any other time that race happens to be the topic of discussion. He poses as this big anti-racist against the Redskins name, while without skipping a beat he just as fiercely denounces anyone who ever mentions issues like racial profiling against blacks or Latinos.

Good to see that Andy's still pulling his hair out at the shocking realization that I don't much care for racists, racism, or racial slurs.

On a related note, Russia has banned the use of certain swear words...
the words in question are apparently certain Russian euphemisms "Describing female and male private parts and sexual intercourse,"

Except that 90% of SBB's allies on this one issue are from the group that he routinely mocks and demonizes any other time that race happens to be the topic of discussion. He poses as this big anti-racist against the Redskins name, while without skipping a beat he just as fiercely denounces anyone who ever mentions issues like racial profiling against blacks or Latinos.

Good to see that Andy's still pulling his hair out at the shocking realization that I don't much care for racists, racism, or racial slurs.

Of course you defend racial and ethnic profiling by pretending that it doesn't exist, or by demanding impossible levels of "proof" in every individual case. But never mind any of that, because you really, really protest the Redskins nickname.

It wouldn't bother me if they changed it, especially since I haven't been a Redskins fan since Snyder bought the team. But I doubt if there's been a single person in history who's ever used that team name in a racially derogatory manner, and I doubt if anyone, anywhere, in any context, in the past 81 years** has ever used "redskin" as an epithet in the real world.*** That's hardly the case for those other names that people try to use as analogies, like n*gg*r or Jew.

**Which was when the team acquired the nickname

***"You ####### Indian" would be the much more likely choice of insult. Using "redskin" to an Indian's face would just make the user seem more than slightly ridiculous, and about as anachronistic as calling a black person an "Ethiopian".

But I doubt if there's been a single person in history who's ever used that team name in a racially derogatory manner, and I doubt if anyone, anywhere, in any context, in the past 81 years** has ever used "redskin" as an epithet in the real world.***

The term is inherently racially derogatory. The fact that people are able to so blithely dismiss Native Americans from their thoughts when they use it -- or defend it -- makes the use more, not less, racist and insulting.

Yeah, shocking that the two modern philosophers making those observations don't even bother to read what they're responding to. As I noted in the immediately preceding post, the last year I rooted for the Redskins was 1998. I do like Griffin, but I wish he could be playing for the Lions or the Browns and let Mark Brunell reclaim the Deadskins quarterbacking job.